[pkg-bacula-devel] Current status of merging development2 branch
alexandro at ankalagon.ru
Sat Jun 2 13:26:47 UTC 2012
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:43:16 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> Hi Alexander!
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:11:33 +0200, Alexander Golovko wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 May 2012 18:16:03 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
>>> If we provide any symlink then we are oblige to announce that to
>>> users when they call /usr/bin/bconsole, which means adding another
>>> wrapper to output something like:
>>> $ bconsole
>>> WARNING: you called /usr/bin/bconsole.
>>> This was a Debian-specific hack and it will be removed once wheezy
>>> been released. Please use /usr/sbin/bconsole instead.
>>> Also given that /etc/bacula/bconsole.conf has ownership
>>> simply having bconsole in /usr/bin/ does not mean that any user can
>>> start it.
>>> However, while checking where bat is installed I found out that it
>>> installed in /usr/bin/ as well, so either we move everything to
>>> /usr/sbin/ (and provide symlinks until post-wheezy) or we leave
>>> everything in /usr/bin/ (and remove /usr/sbin/bacula-console
>>> post-wheezy). Upstream seems to install everything in /usr/sbin/,
>>> so I
>>> would follow upstream.
>> I don't have any definitive answer yet, so will do as you say.
> Basically, if we follow upstream what we need is:
> 1) install everything as upstream
> 2) provide symlinks for the old locations
> 3) explain everything in NEWS.Debian
> 4) after wheezy, remove the symlinks
>>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 23:19:23 +0200, Alexander Golovko wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 13:57:34 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 02:40:22 +0200, Alexander Golovko wrote:
>>>>>> * d77e917 Fix errors in man pages
>>>>> This should be pushed upstream, I will do later on.
>>>> Yes, i didn't do this, because manpages still contain errors. This
>>>> commit only fix lintian errors.
>>> OK, I will wait then ;-)
>> fixed in c6de23f
> Thank you, should I forward upstream or have you already done it? In
> this latter case, please also update the patch with the upstream bug
If it will not be difficult, forward it to upstream, please.
And Hauke patch "fix-example-script-syntax" too, please.
>>>> You are right partially.
>>>> Debian-like is not "conffiles", but safe process of package
>>>> Dpkg conffiles is only one of methods for solve config update
>>>> In our case ucf is much more better for this purpose.
>>> I see two advantages of dpkg-conffiles: first, you are prompted
>>> upgrades and, second, they are listed in a central places, i.e.
>>> /var/lib/dpkg/info/dpkg.conffiles. I know about ucf, but I have
>>> played with it and I still think that this should have been
>>> in dpkg, but this is another story ;-)
>> ucf like dpkg prompt user, when it need update changed by user
>> ucf register managed files in /var/lib/dpkg/info/package.conffiles.
> Thank you for the explanation :-)
> Thx, bye,
> Gismo / Luca
with best regards,
email: alexandro at ankalagon.ru
xmpp: alexandro at ankalagon.ru
More information about the pkg-bacula-devel